On 1/3/02 at 5:24 PM Dexter wrote: >On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, ZN wrote: > >> the PCB design leaves a LOT to be desired. It seems that whoever did it >> is not very experienced. IMHO the board could have been 2/3 or even half >> the size. > > The designer actually said on the site that it was a prototype board and > wasn't optimized for size or cost, and that they could easily reduce the > size by that amount... > Just being fair...
True, maybe I did speak out of turn since I only gave it a quick look. >Does anyone here have any experience with Eagle v4? What package do you >folks over at Q60 HQ use? I tried it a long time ago in DOS, I think it was still V1 :-) I used Tango for a long time (great all-rounder there, not the best at anything but extremely usable). And then Accell got bought out by the makers of Protel, which is what I use now. When I started with it, it was absolutely horrible, did everything Protel did if you managed to get around the bugs, but under windows and about 10x slower. Fortunately, they cured a lot of the bugs, and the CPU speed caught up with the slow code :-) Nasta
